Pathfinder 2E I played my first PF2e game this week. Here's why I'm less inclined to play again.

[SpellObjectEnthusiast]

PF2 is significantly Heavier than most other RPGs. You have to sacrifice a lot of good things about the systems to cram a meaningful session into a short time slot, especially if that time slot includes reading pregens and explaining the rules.

 

[DaveMage]

I'm still happily playing PF1. PF2 veered too much into the D&D 4E-like sphere for my interest. (Which makes it so surprising they went there considering PF1 flourished because of D&D 4E.)

But, since there are about 1,000,000 PF1 supplements and adventures, I would not have needed PF2 anyway.

 

[Velderan]

PF2 is significantly Heavier than most other RPGs. You have to sacrifice a lot of good things about the systems to cram a meaningful session into a short time slot, especially if that time slot includes reading pregens and explaining the rules.

Eh, I don't see any reason you can't run a PF2e scenario in 2 hours featuring some roleplaying, a short journey to arrive at wherever the scenario's goal is, and a combat or two to show the 3 phases of the game, how actions work, and how the 3 action economy works in combat. If I were running a game that I remotely thought new players could be in, I would present simple pregen options and cheat sheet cards featuring the basics (basically what's in the Beginner Box). Most of the rules don't need to be explained beyond just asking the player what they're doing and having the GM work out the mechanical impact and telling the player to roll when needed.

 

[Thomas Shey]

I'm still happily playing PF1. PF2 veered too much into the D&D 4E-like sphere for my interest. (Which makes it so surprising they went there considering PF1 flourished because of D&D 4E.)

But, since there are about 1,000,000 PF1 supplements and adventures, I would not have needed PF2 anyway.

I'd presume they concluded some elements of 4e were a good place to go after extended experience with PF1e. The fact it was a bridge too far for some people doesn't mean it was all bad, and one has to keep in mind they're competing with 5e now, not 4e, and most of the disgruntled 4e players are either supplied with all the PF1e material they're ever going to need, or moved on to D&D 5e, so there's not much upside to them just doing more of the same.

 

[Staffan]

I'd presume they concluded some elements of 4e were a good place to go after extended experience with PF1e. The fact it was a bridge too far for some people doesn't mean it was all bad, and one has to keep in mind they're competing with 5e now, not 4e, and most of the disgruntled 4e players are either supplied with all the PF1e material they're ever going to need, or moved on to D&D 5e, so there's not much upside to them just doing more of the same.

The issues with PF1 were much the same as the ones with 3.5e, so it makes sense that the solutions would have similarities in common but not be identical.

 

[payn]

Eh, I don't see any reason you can't run a PF2e scenario in 2 hours featuring some roleplaying, a short journey to arrive at wherever the scenario's goal is, and a combat or two to show the 3 phases of the game, how actions work, and how the 3 action economy works in combat. If I were running a game that I remotely thought new players could be in, I would present simple pregen options and cheat sheet cards featuring the basics (basically what's in the Beginner Box). Most of the rules don't need to be explained beyond just asking the player what they're doing and having the GM work out the mechanical impact and telling the player to roll when needed.

PFS during PF1 era anyway, was 4 hour windows. I think thats what you want, or at least it is if you are tossing inventors at newbs.

 

[Incenjucar]

There's a trend of moving from D&D to PF2E being jarring because the similarities and differences cause some crossed wire whiplash.

PF2 overall involves a lot more choices each round with better and worse outcomes, while 5E more or less guarantees a certain quality of life with each turn on exchange for less flexibility. You can have a truly incredible round in PF2, but a solid round is more guaranteed in 5E.

5E also pushes a lot of the math into the strong but self-nullifying advantage system, while PF2 is direct math vs. math (both have both, but the ratio is reversed).

PF2 is going to, on average, take more work than 5E, but that work can pay off quite well.

 

[Velderan]

PFS during PF1 era anyway, was 4 hour windows. I think thats what you want, or at least it is if you are tossing inventors at newbs.

PFS is still around 4 hours, but the scenarios I have read or played seem to include 3-4 combats. I agree that’s better to run a more satisfying session, I just think it is possible to demo enough of the game in 2 hours if you’re being mindful of what you’re doing.